• U.S.

Public Eye: Alienable Rights

3 minute read
Margaret Carlson

Governor Pete Wilson of California and I have something in common. At one time in our lives, we both liked cheap labor. I did 15 years ago when I was looking for a baby-sitter. Mary Poppins was too expensive, so I settled for Elba. All I had to do was paper over immigration questions with work permits and I had someone who looked after my daughter as if she were her own, cooked the meals, washed the windows and swabbed the bathroom — all for minimum wage.

Wilson developed his affection for cheap labor during the 1980s when he was a Senator from California, and growers in his state wanted a constant, reliable supply of farmworkers. So he sponsored the Seasonal Agricultural Worker program, which ensured that hundreds of thousands of Elbas could enter the country as guest workers without complying with immigration laws. It was a loophole that truckloads of Mexicans could drive through — and Wilson was so pleased that he trumpeted it in his 1990 campaign as a “political coup.”

But times have grown ugly. Blaming illegal immigrants — indeed, immigrants — for the tarnish on the Golden State is a centerpiece of the Wilson re- election campaign. He supports the draconian Proposition 187, known as S.O.S. (Save Our State), which would deny Elba a doctor if she got sick and her children their DPT shots and a place in first grade. Teachers and health- care workers would turn into snitches, asked to turn in any child suspected of having parents here illegally. Children would be encouraged to tell on their parents.

. Prop 187 is so harsh — and probably unconstitutional — that several respected Republicans have come out against it — and, by extension, against Wilson. In a year when Republicans have so far stuck together like Gummi Bears, Jack Kemp and William Bennett, both ambitious men unlikely to buck their party, tried appealing to conscience. While acknowledging that illegal immigration must be stopped, they argued that Prop 187 is a nativist measure that appeals to the angry and won’t fix the problem. The measure, said Kemp, would “corrode the soul of the party.” Bennett warned, “It is going to label all immigrants; it is going to turn into a war of colors, a war of races — it’s bad stuff. It is poison in a democracy.”

Conscience is one thing, winning another. Polls show 59% of likely voters favoring S.O.S. Michael Huffington, who was so respectful of Bennett that he plugged Bennett’s The Book of Virtues in his campaign ads, ignored him and endorsed the initiative. Two weeks earlier, Huffington didn’t even know what Prop 187 was. Said he: “I have not yet made a public stand on 170 — er, what was that?”

The illogic of any crackdown is that most studies of Latino immigrants show they have a strong work ethic, tight-knit families and a low use of public services. Despite being underpaid and undereducated, few cross the border to collect welfare. A recent study of census data showed that 16.9% of Latino immigrants in Los Angeles County received public assistance in 1990, compared with 41.7% of the non-Latino white population and 64.6% of blacks.

America is partly a land of dreams because it is a country of laws, made with deliberation. Prop 187 was slapped together in a moment of anger by a handful of citizens accountable to no one and taken up by candidates afraid to be seen as soft. The best way to reduce illegal immigration is to enforce the laws on the books right now — not create new ones that no one has given a moment’s thought to.

More Must-Reads from TIME

Contact us at letters@time.com